IN RE BRAZIL MINORS

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of OLIVIA LENORA BRAZIL, EDWINA LENORA BRAZIL, STACEY LENORA BRAZIL, and TRACEY LENORA BRAZIL, Minors. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED September 18, 1998 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 203387 Wayne Juvenile Court LC No. 79-215736 LENORA SHROPSHIRE, Respondent-Appellant, and EVAN M. BRAZIL, Respondent. Before: Whitbeck, P.J., McDonald and T. G. Hicks*, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent-appellant appeals, by delayed application for leave to appeal granted, a juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), (i) and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(c)(i), (g), (i) and (j). We affirm. Respondent has only challenged the juvenile court's decision to terminate her parental rights under § 19b(3)(g). Because the juvenile court was only required to find one statutory ground for termination of respondent's rights, In re Jackson, 199 Mich App 22, 25; 501 NW2d 182 (1993), and * Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment. -1­ because respondent does not challenge the termination of her parental rights under §§ 19b(3)(c)(i), (i) and (j), respondent-appellant is not entitled to relief on appeal. Regardless, the juvenile court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination were established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Respondent's past neglect of other children and her inability to make significant progress with her substance abuse problem justified termination of her parental rights by the juvenile court. Also, respondent failed to show that termination of her parental rights was clearly not in the children’s best interest. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5). Thus, the juvenile court did not err in terminating respondent's parental rights to the children. Affirmed. /s/ William C. Whitbeck /s/ Gary R. McDonald /s/ Timothy G. Hicks -2­

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.